https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68372
--- Comment #3 from wilhelm.me...@hs-kl.de ---
This ICE still exists in:
g++ (GCC) 8.0.0 20170515 (experimental)
Here is another minimal example:
template
concept bool FCallable() {
return requires(F) {
F::f();
};
}
class Test1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80772
Bug ID: 80772
Summary: GCC ignores default template argument declaration in
the template definition
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80771
Bug ID: 80771
Summary: GCC ignores default template argument declaration in
the template definition
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80764
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77721
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|patch |
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79286
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- |https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80741
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
My initial looks are seeing a DTIO related frontend issue but this is not
causing the regression as far as I can tell.
I have looked at several other intervening patches and don't see anything
obvious, so I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #15)
> The new testcase FAILs on 64-bit Solaris/SPARC:
>
> +FAIL: gfortran.dg/dtio_26.f03 -O0 execution test
See if fixed on trunk now after commit to fix 80767.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80674
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80727
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Mon May 15 23:48:39 2017
New Revision: 248080
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248080&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-15 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran/80727
* tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80674
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon May 15 23:46:23 2017
New Revision: 248079
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248079&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-15 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/80674
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80770
Bug ID: 80770
Summary: suboptimal code negating a 1-bit _Bool field
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80752
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80752
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon May 15 23:02:42 2017
New Revision: 248078
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248078&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-15 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/80752
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80759
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Santos ---
Actually, I just realized that it won't help to move do_test.S into ms-sysv.c
as inline asm because each test still needs a unique ms-sysv-generated.h header
that's generated by the output of gen.cc. Althoug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80752
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon May 15 20:43:25 2017
New Revision: 248076
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248076&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-15 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/80752
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80767
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80602
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
I just committed r248074 which I suspect is the same problem
(the fix for PR 80765).
If you could just upgrade to the most recent trunk (only
need to upgrade libgfortran, really) an check if the fix
also wor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79369
--- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Mon May 15 20:26:19 2017
New Revision: 248075
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248075&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79369
* g++.dg/cpp1z/nested-namespace-def1.C: Adj
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80602
Pat Haugen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80769
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80765
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80765
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon May 15 20:06:06 2017
New Revision: 248074
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248074&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-15 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/80765
* m4/matmu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79369
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63261
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Petazzoni ---
This bug still exists in gcc 5.4.0 on Microblaze.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79369
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Mon May 15 19:35:52 2017
New Revision: 248073
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248073&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/cp/
PR c++/79369
* cp-tree.h (DECL_NAMESPACE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80752
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Mon May 15 19:34:52 2017
New Revision: 248072
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248072&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-15 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/80752
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80752
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Assignee|unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80425
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Mostly fixed, an issue from Comment #4 remains, although *zero_extendsidi2
pattern now reads:
(define_insn "*zero_extendsidi2"
[(set (match_operand:DI 0 "nonimmediate_operand"
"=r,?r,?o,r ,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80425
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon May 15 19:04:35 2017
New Revision: 248070
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248070&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
* config/i386.i386.md (*zero_extendsidi2): Do not penalize
no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80737
--- Comment #6 from Tim Shen ---
(In reply to TC from comment #5)
> (In reply to Tim Shen from comment #3)
> > (In reply to TC from comment #1)
> > > Looks like the constraint on the convert-everything constructor needs to
> > > check for is_same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80769
Bug ID: 80769
Summary: Invalid delayed string length computation in
tree-ssa-strlen.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80752
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:57:38PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Here's two possible patches.
>
Here's a 3rd possible patch, and it appears to do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80754
wilco at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80759
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Santos ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
> It seems to me that ms-sysv.exp is seriously misguided in trying to do all
> its compilations manually instead of using
> dg-test/dg-runtest/gcc_target_compile
> wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80752
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80730
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Mon, 15 May 2017, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80730
>
> --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
> I"m not sure I understand what you're
On Mon, 15 May 2017, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80730
>
> --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
> I"m not sure I understand what you're saying. Your comment that "the
> initializer *as
> converted* must be a constant expression (and, thus, to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80741
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80747
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Hi Zhangwen,
That patch looks correct. The explanation maybe not: the problem happens
if the earliest "end" is the entry block itself, not a real BB (that is,
if we start the function with a newly inse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50392
--- Comment #14 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 04:57:37PM +, zeccav at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50392
>
> --- Comment #13 from Vittorio Zecca ---
> Steve, you know why I do not like y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50392
--- Comment #13 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Steve, you know why I do not like you.
If you are so sensitive please take care of the sensitivity of people
submitting bugs
and do not call them "idiot".
But this is not relevant here.
What is relevant is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80768
Bug ID: 80768
Summary: NULL pointer dereferenced in gfc_check_num_images at
fortran/check.c
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80763
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80730
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
I"m not sure I understand what you're saying. Your comment that "the
initializer *as
converted* must be a constant expression (and, thus, to be an address
constant, must be of pointer type)" makes it sound
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80605
--- Comment #8 from Ed Catmur ---
Looks to have been fixed by r247816.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80737
--- Comment #5 from TC ---
(In reply to Tim Shen from comment #3)
> (In reply to TC from comment #1)
> > Looks like the constraint on the convert-everything constructor needs to
> > check for is_same, variant> first and short circuit if that's
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80762
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65430
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
Well, that's not quite right because of e.g. unevaluated || operand.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80763
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
Problem now seems to be between revision 236947 and 236961.
Continuing the search.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65430
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
This ought to fix both problems:
--- a/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
+++ b/gcc/c/c-typeck.c
@@ -10443,6 +10443,7 @@ tree
c_process_expr_stmt (location_t loc, tree expr)
{
tree exprv;
+ tree orig_expr = expr;
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80767
Bug ID: 80767
Summary: Eager instantiation of member template when not
required
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
Bug ID: 80766
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE with type bound procedures
returning an array
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50392
--- Comment #12 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 02:27:04PM +, zeccav at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> --- Comment #11 from Vittorio Zecca ---
> You still around, Steven?
> I cannot say I missed you.
I've never left, and you're more
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80728
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On May 15, 2017 4:43:04 PM GMT+02:00, "amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80728
>
>--- Comment #6 from Alexander Monakov ---
>I think a possible app
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80659
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> Marek, can you please take a look why the VAR_DECL built from the expr_stmt
> is not assigned in a BIND_EXPR?
In C, non-static compound literals aren't pushed int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80765
Bug ID: 80765
Summary: [8 Regression] 178.galgel in SPEC CPU 2000 fails to
run
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
20170515 (experimental) [trunk revision 248042] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -O3 small.c
small.c: In function ‘fn1.part.0’:
small.c:12:1: error: size of loop 9 should be 6, not 7
}
^
small.c:12:1: error: loop 10’s latch does not have an edge to its header
small.c:12:1: internal compiler error: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80763
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
>The problem seems to exist between revisions 247438 and 247811.
>I'll have a go at trying to reduce that range.
I'm wrong with my range of revisions. Problem now seems to exist sometime
before revision 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80763
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Here is the reduced code
struct b {
virtual ~b();
};
struct c {
virtual unsigned d(unsigned, unsigned);
virtual unsigned f(unsigned, unsigned, unsigned, unsigned) = 0;
};
template class i : e, c {
p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80763
Bug ID: 80763
Summary: -O3 causes error: inline clone in same comdat group
list
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80728
--- Comment #6 from Alexander Monakov ---
I think a possible approach is to add a new cgraph_node flag (or a multi-bit
field, if we want to track presence of acquire/release/seq-cst compiler
barriers separately), handle asms and atomics specially
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50392
--- Comment #11 from Vittorio Zecca ---
You still around, Steven?
I cannot say I missed you.
Nobody asked me to apply those fixes, I imagined that Tobias Burnus,
their author,
would try them and eventually apply them.
It seems that it did not ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80762
Bug ID: 80762
Summary: is_constructible gives hard
error with clang
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80761
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80761
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 15 14:01:38 2017
New Revision: 248063
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248063&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix order and types of members in C++17 insert_return_type structs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80754
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80761
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon May 15 13:47:40 2017
New Revision: 248062
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248062&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix order and types of members in C++17 insert_return_type structs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80756
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Mon, 15 May 2017, nsz at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> fabs and fma identifiers are reserved for the implementation and it is valid
> to
> treat them as constant expression in initializers ba
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80735
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80756
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Mon, 15 May 2017, vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net wrote:
> GCC misses a diagnostic when the fabs() or fma() function is used in an
> initializer. For instance, consider:
There are pedwarns
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79849
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79850
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80756
--- Comment #4 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to nsz from comment #3)
> fabs and fma identifiers are reserved for the implementation and it is valid
> to treat them as constant expression in initializers based on c99 6.6p10
Well, if is incl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31468
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80730
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Sat, 13 May 2017, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> I don't see what purpose rejecting
>
> bool b = "";
>
> serves when
>
> bool b = !!"";
>
> or even
>
> bool b = "" ? 1 : 0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80756
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80761
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(and the order of the structure members is also wrong)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80728
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 15 May 2017, amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80728
>
> --- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov ---
> ipa-reference.c has:
>
> /* Set of a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80761
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80760
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80728
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov ---
ipa-reference.c has:
/* Set of all interesting module statics. A bit is set for every module
static we are considering. This is added to the local info when asm
code is found that clobbers all me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80761
Bug ID: 80761
Summary: std::set::insert_return_type uses wrong
iterator type
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31468
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon May 15 12:48:35 2017
New Revision: 248060
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248060&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not allow empty argument of -o option (PR driver/31468).
2017-05-15 M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80757
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80752
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80747
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67147
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80760
Bug ID: 80760
Summary: Suggested clarification of an error message
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80746
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80743
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80742
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80659
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80732
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80732
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2017-5-15
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80758
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80759
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80759
Bug ID: 80759
Summary: gcc.target/x86_64/abi/ms-sysv FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80758
Bug ID: 80758
Summary: isnan/isfinite/isinf value propagation
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiz
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
